Theories behind the customer value drivers

Three elements are also related to customer value drivers, which are oriented towards the development process of Consumer Information System (CIS). The-oretical basis for these factors origin from the execution of customer involve-ment (Barki & Hartwick, 1994; Cavaye, 1995; Kujala, 2003; von Hippel, 2005), consumption patterns (Westbrook & Oliver, 1991), the psychology of optimal experience (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Agarwal & Karahanna, 2000) and the he-donic utility (Holbrook et al., 1984; Kahneman, Diener & Schwarz, 2003). Barki and Hartwick (1994) defined the term user participation to be a set of opera-tions and activities performed by users during IS development. Cavaye (1995) added that participation isn’t however a clear-cut concept but instead in prac-tice it can occur at many levels.

The factors related to the user when talking about user participation are willingness to participate, ability to participate and the user characteris-tics/attitudes. The previous studies have shown that there isn’t direct relation-ship between user involvement and information system success (Barki and Hartwick, 1994; Cavaye, 1995.). However, later studies have accepted user in-volvement as a proven principle in the development of usable systems (Kujala,

2003; von Hippel, 2005). Kujala (2003) studied the benefits and challenges in user involvement and stated that it clearly has positive effects on both system success and user satisfaction yet it can be a challenging task for designers. Os-terwalder and Pigneur (2010) argued that companies invest heavily in market research, but don’t pay enough attention to the customer perspective when de-signing products and services. They added that building a successful innova-tion requires an understanding of customers including environment, daily rou-tines, concerns and endeavors (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010).

The term customer involvement is having increasing popularity with aca-demic marketing texts although it has been merely seen as an information-process from customers to the firm (Lundkvist & Yakhlef, 2004). Companies have been rushing into the customer involvement bandwagon in hopes of giv-ing them better cost/time product development curve and reduced uncertainty (Lundkvist & Yakhlef, 2004). Lundkvist and Yakhlef (2004) proposed a more conversational approach that requires a more active participation from the cus-tomers, which leads to co-creation of ideas and action. They added that a con-versation works best when it can give natural knowledge, new insights and un-thought-of ideas. In a book on electronic marketing, Chaffey and Smith (2013) suggest that collaborative co-creation is a natural instinct and humans actually perform far less selfishly than previously assumed.

Even if customers are willing to pay for customized products exactly for their need, it is important to understand why customers want to innovate for themselves rather than hire a custom manufacturer to develop the product fast-er and cheapfast-er. One reason for this could be the enjoyment of the innovation process and the learning that it brings to them. Another motivator is the enjoy-ment of the problem-solving process that is included in designing the product.

In an empirical finding it was discovered that users often freely reveal their in-novations to other users (von Hippel, 2005.). Rewarding the customers is one way of adding value to the relationship and they’re multiple innovative ap-proaches to reward and encourage online customer loyalty (Chaffey & Smith, 2013).

Westbrook and Oliver (1991) did research the causal relationship between product-consumption experiences and consumer satisfaction. The results of their studies indicated that the customer happiness and delight patterns were linked to high levels of satisfaction, although different contexts such as product purchasing and product maintenance may give different results (Westbrook &

Oliver, 1991.). Hedonic consumption experiences also play a large part in buy-ing decisions (Holbrook et al., 1984).

Holbrook et al. (1984) studied “play” as a consumption experience and in-vestigated the phenomena of playful consumption. The results of the study suggested that consumer behavior should be more focused on consumption, consuming and using instead of purchase, buying and choosing. Holbrook et al.

(1984) stated in his games study that consumers engage emotionally and imagi-natively when making purchase decisions. He introduced a term “playful con-sumption” which indicates that hedonic utilities show a large part in the value consumption process.

Previous research has found emotions to be an important factor of con-sumer behavior, but there it is still unclear how to measure emotions such as joy, fear and guilt when linked to product ownership and brand loyalty (Richins, 1997). Kahneman et al. (2003) admitted that the utility concept is a key concept in economics, but argued that the link between hedonic experience and the con-trol of action is less influential than what previous research has indicated. The study by Kahneman et al. (2003) stated that we couldn’t predict individual’s choice of behavior by knowing his utility values and we could only observe the choice process. Another view on user consumption process is the flow concept (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990), which describes the optimal experience and a com-plete absorption in what one does.

Flow is focused motivation that associates with the user having clear goals and outcomes in task at hand (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Agarwal & Karahanna, 2000). Agarwal and Karahanna (2000) studied the cognitive absorption and the concept of flow in the context of World Wide Web and pointed out the im-portance of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use when using mation systems. Chaffey and Smith (2013) emphasized that in today’s infor-mation cluttered and time-compressed world consumers are busy and don’t like wasting time. These money-rich, time-poor customers want to find infor-mation quickly and make transactions easily.

Based on the case studies by Tuunanen et al. (2010) it seems that the flow concept has a significant role in information system design and there is evi-dence that the test participants valued the experience of flow in the information system that was used as a test environment. The findings of the study by Tuun-anen et al. (2010) indicate that flow should be a part of development of the in-teractive service experience since it gives pleasure and enjoyment in use. Other implications from the Agarwal & Karahanna study include the importance of (OVP) and stated that the proposition should be able to offer some unique ad-vantages such as immediacy, interactivity, depth and relevance of content, con-venience and more resources. One way to offer relevant content is to use cus-tomized portals, which has been empirically seen to raise perceived relevance, involvement, interactivity and novelty in consumers (Kalyanaraman & Sundar, 2006). The OVP should reinforce the core brand values and company strengths.

It is important to clearly summarize the complete list of features, benefits and prices with offering the full experience of selecting, buying and using the prod-uct of service. Chaffey and Smith added that the buying process in an online system must be seamless and efficient, since a well-managed process integrates business processes and systems that, in turn shaves costs from the supplier (Chaffey & Smith, 2013.).